Horses 1908

Editor: Right, so here we have David Burliuk's "Horses," painted in 1908 with oil on canvas. There's a certain…awkwardness to their posture that’s really striking, almost like a child's drawing but amplified with these bold, clashing colors. How do you even begin to interpret a piece like this? Curator: Ah, yes, Burliuk! He had such a delightfully chaotic mind. This work feels to me like a primal scream translated into paint. Forget anatomical correctness; it’s all about raw, untamed energy. The Fauvist colours shout, don't they? I imagine Burliuk wasn't aiming to paint horses so much as to capture the very *essence* of horse-ness: their strength, their wildness, perhaps even a little of their vulnerability. Don't you see it? Editor: I think I do. So, it's not necessarily about what the horses *look* like, but more what they *represent*, or how they *feel*? Curator: Precisely! And look at the brushstrokes – almost violent in their application. He’s not trying to soothe us with beauty, but to jolt us awake. It’s as though he's saying, “Here is life, unfiltered, messy, and utterly magnificent." Imagine the world from their perspective, perhaps that helps see his perspective as well. Editor: That makes sense. I was so focused on the somewhat distorted figures that I missed the passion behind the execution. I do get this feeling, an untamed feeling that it is being passed. It's powerful, despite the somewhat simple subject. Curator: Indeed. He turns the everyday into something… explosive. That, my dear, is the magic of Burliuk. This exercise helped clarify the tension within art, didn't it? Editor: Absolutely, I never really focused in Fauvism's core principles! I see now a real glimpse of that core from this angle, this helped me re-think it.